Iron Man Table?

[blantyr]

Disorder wiped out all the order forces on the moon.  I guess that is what happens when you put two giants like the emperor's together to see who's got the bigger template.....

Go big or go home!

Last two years I've lined up opposite players who had gone big...  four stompas last year, and the Black Emperor this year.  There is some truth to the saying, "Go big or go home."  While both years I had considered the possibility of seeing Big Stuff, and had slanted my force accordingly, it seems difficult to design a force that can reasonably fight either an all Big Stuff player or 4000 points of codex stuff.

From what I heard on the Surface table, Rob's titans gave Order a supremacy in D templates, which made Disorder vehicles die quickly while monstrous creatures with no invulnerable saves just vanished with toughness doubled.  On the moon, we had two of five Disorder players going all big stuff.  It wasn't all just the Big Stuff that produced the lunar wipe out.  Disorder used their stratagems very effectively and used teamwork rather than just fighting one on one with the person stationed opposite them on the board.  Yet, without Big Stuff to match the Black Emperor, I might as well have just gone home.  The one on one duel between the 4000 point Emperor and the 530 point Frisbee wasn't exactly even.  The Black Emperor never needed to dedicate more than one of its eight weapons to suppressing the Frisbee.  The Frisbee never fired its main gun.

There are proposals to limit the amount of Big Stuff a player might field next year.  I have proposed a limit of 700 points a player, a number which might be debated and tweaked.  This would allow everyone a respectable toy, a Baneblade variant, a Warhound or a Frisbee.  Perhaps different limits might be proposed for different tables.

On the other hand, I like the idea of seeing Rob's titans, the giant Red Emperor or Rich's exotic collection seeing battle again.  I don't know that the all Big Stuff forces should be locked out, yet I don't know that it is fair to the people opposite them if some of them aren't.

Thus, there is a proposal for an 'Iron Man Table.'  Rather than tell the Big Boy players to go home, might we put them somewhere where they can fight opposition in their own weight class?

If there were such a table, how many players would want to play on it, and with what sort of force?  How many would try to spend 4000 points on super heavies?  How many would go in with a more traditional force, and try to prove small models can go toe to toe with the Big Stuff?

[General Leevous]

Bob even though they spent all their points on big stuff, 2 of the 5 players literally had no scoring units. Its also about strategy, I'm pretty sure if you wave serpent with star engines a bunch of fire dragons up to the emperor it woulda fell pretty quick. That thing can't hit anyone within like 3 feet of it with its carapace weapons anyway. Its just all about strategy when dealing with such a monstrosity. When I knew nick was bringing his emperor, I was planning strategies to take that thing on that day. I like a lot of big stuff on the field cuz it makes the game a lot more interesting. And I was in the same boat with my plague tower, it died before I even used it and I lost half of my force inside turn 1. But I endured and looked to the help of my teammates and we finally pushed the enemy foreward enough to score. Its just all about strategy and how you deal with certain things is all I'm sayin.

[Rurouni Benshin]

Both Lee and Bob make good points about strategy and game play.  I don't know if I'd be on board with a point limitation on the amount of Superheavies a player would be allowed to bring, because I think the very essence of the Megabattle is, in part, being able to bring stuff like the Emperor Titan, or Reavers, and whatnot have you.

Now the idea of an Iron Man Table, that's something that I thought got thrown around earlier prior to this year's Megabattle starting.  I could be mistaken about that, but if there were to be something like this at next year's Megabattle, it could be an interesting table just to watch unfold.

[blantyr]

Bob even though they spent all their points on big stuff, 2 of the 5 players literally had no scoring units. Its also about strategy, I'm pretty sure if you wave serpent with star engines a bunch of fire dragons up to the emperor it woulda fell pretty quick. That thing can't hit anyone within like 3 feet of it with its carapace weapons anyway. Its just all about strategy when dealing with such a monstrosity. When I knew nick was bringing his emperor, I was planning strategies to take that thing on that day. I like a lot of big stuff on the field cuz it makes the game a lot more interesting. And I was in the same boat with my plague tower, it died before I even used it and I lost half of my force inside turn 1. But I endured and looked to the help of my teammates and we finally pushed the enemy foreward enough to score. Its just all about strategy and how you deal with certain things is all I'm sayin.

I did have a falcon full of dragons.  Any Big Model that lined up on the deploy line to charge into close combat would have eaten some strength 8 + 2d6 fusion shots, and found itself in close combat with
Feugen, the Fire Dragon Phoenix lord.  However, the Black Emperor is a shooting titan.  He deployed against the back edge.  I couldn't reach him on turn one.  They were dead before they could reach.

Under 40K V4 rules, distance between shooter and target was measured horizontally.  V5 measures ranges in three dimensions, from tip of the gun to the nearest point of the target.  As the weapons on the top of the Black Emperor were more than 36 inches in the air, there are no effective minimum range limits on the Black Emperor.  I thought what you said above was true, but discovered only after moving my titan killing units into what I mistakenly thought was a safer region that the Black Emperor had no meaningful minimum range.  Dan's Tau included deep striking units equipped with EMP grenades, but he too could not survive the one round between deep strike and assault given that the 36 inch minimum had unexpectedly vanished.

It is possible to plan and create strategies.  If I had squared off against the Brass Scorpion and the Banelord deployed on the front line, things might have been interesting.  If the Black Emperor had been played with minimum ranges, it might have been interesting.  My plans were by no means adequate against the Black Emperor as Chase and Derek decided to play it, under a quite reasonable interpretation of the letter of the current rules.  I did have three scatter laser equipped war walkers that were able to strip all the Black Emperor's void shields to nothing in two rounds of fire, but by that time there were no more weapons available to Order that could penetrate its armor.  The Black Emperor was throwing 18 five inch D templates a turn with no minimum range, plus the two arm weapons.

But you did not answer the question.  If you had a choice between an Iron Man table and a more moderate table, would you choose the Iron Man?

[blantyr]

Both Lee and Bob make good points about strategy and game play.  I don't know if I'd be on board with a point limitation on the amount of Superheavies a player would be allowed to bring, because I think the very essence of the Megabattle is, in part, being able to bring stuff like the Emperor Titan, or Reavers, and whatnot have you.

Now the idea of an Iron Man Table, that's something that I thought got thrown around earlier prior to this year's Megabattle starting.  I could be mistaken about that, but if there were to be something like this at next year's Megabattle, it could be an interesting table just to watch unfold.

I was present for a brief discussion of limits on the amount of points spent on super-heavies for this year's battle.  Derek and Chase were of the opinion, as you indicated in your lead paragraph, that the essence of the Megabattle is anything goes.  I was not aware of any talk about an Iron Man table, though I might well have just missed it.

Anyway, we've got lots of time to talk things over.  At this point, I'm just interested in learning how many people really like no-holds-barred.  If the option was available, how many would choose it of their own free will. 

My other thought is if we have four all super-heavy players, two Order, two Disorder, might it be prudent that we pair them evenly?  Is putting 3 of them on a small table and one of them on the big table really the best option?

[Rurouni Benshin]

I think limiting the amount of players to fielding Superheavies, again, sort of defeats the purpose of the Megabattle.  Yes, it would be interesting to see who'd willingly choose a "no holds barred" type of event versus something less competitive, but I don't think that would change the game any, in the end you're going to have people who won't play Superheavies out of choice, taste, fluff, etc, and you're going to have players who play nothing but Superheavies because they want to win (with Superheavies).

All in all, with the current crowd at BG playing the styles they play, I don't think seeing this format being offered at next year's Megabattle will change too much.

[Rob S]

I actually do support limiting superheavies, I spoke with Derek about it briefly to something like 1 per person and you can't trade yours to let someone field 2.  Though I do like bringing my legion.

Instead of limiting it, I think we should have designated zones for them to be in.  Let me use the planetside table from  this year to give an example.  Say that the swamp was too soft and the city too cluttered to for them to move around (or even go far enough to say that only scout class titans can).  This leaves any titans on the planet surface to set up in the highlands (or whatever it was called, the two tables outside the city opposite the swamp).  This way, while the titans can have an effect on the normal battle going on, they also are pitted against each other more than anyone else.  This might limit the amount of devastation one could do against an army  not equipped to deal with them, while still making it possible for titans to affect the battle going on at their feet.

[Logan007]

I support player limits too.

These megabattles have turned into something of an arms race on each side -- I wouldn't have fielded an emperor titan if I didn't think we'd have been severely out numbered in terms of super heavies.

I'd support something like: 1 super heavy per player (transferable so Rob can field his titan legion again), no one model may be fielded that is worth more than 2500 points. Super heavies worth more than 1500 points count as 2.

[jesterofthedark]

how'd everyone feel about the limitations or lack of them compared to previous years??

Flank March being an example, this year we removed the house rule of not being able to enter from an opponent's deployment zone.  I think on our table it was not devastating but I heard on other tables it was not well received?


Well, see now mike there is a problem with that when you think of how some players may pressure to get their super heavies on the board.  Ideally, player A has to super heavies and player B has none, great Player A fields his units.  But what happens when Player A, in his opinion has better super heavies than Player B.  Now Obviously Player B doesn't have to do anything but when the team starts planning for the event will he be pressured to leave his at home for the good of the team??

Good example, I am not a fan of the doomdays device today (my opinion may change between now and next year ) Should I put the pressure on that player to not field the unit he finds fun because me bringing two stompas would cause more carnage???

[the_trooper]

I'm torn.  This year my banelord wasn't as obvious in it's inssanity given its goal of meleeing the emperor.  Had it not been locked in combat, it had a 1 in 6 chance of firefrenzy.   It's crazed chart makes it a bit more balanced than say a quad d weapon warlord.

If the teams match their killing potential, there is no need for limiting.  That won't be the case considering all the newish players to apocalypse.  MAD can affect things, I'm sure.

[blantyr]

It is regrettable that the Black Emperor was created to correct a perceived imbalance in all superheavy players, but because 3 of the all superheavy players ended up on the same board, the potential for a balanced situation was missed.  This might be avoided next year.

We are having a bunch of constructive proposals put forward.  Some might want 'transfers' to balance a table, with a player without a superheavy being able to give his rights to someone who wants to run two.  Others say no to transfers.  There are suggestions for an Iron Man table, while Rob suggests creating fluffy reasons why the really big models will be limited to specific areas of a table.  There are different limits proposed to how much superheavy would be considered too much.

I really don't want the Titan Legion or Red Emperor retired, but I have been unfortunate enough in the last two years to have faced off against something I couldn't touch.  I'd kind of like a year off.

I would note that we are apt to have multiple tables again next year.  We don't need to have one perfect solution.  We might find three different solutions, and let players select the style they prefer.  At the moment we have proposed Iron Man table, a 2500 point limit table, and a 700 point limit table.  I suspect that if the Iron Man table exists, the middle level point limit ought to be somewhat lower.  We have a good long time to talk it through.

I'm also thinking the various players with fighter aircraft might arrange to meet over the same table next year.  Rather than trying to create mismatches, where one's team has clear superiority in a given area on a given table, might we seek interesting battles, creating fluffy reasons for fair fights.

Anyway, I'd be interested in hearing if Rob and Logan could come to an agreement on that they think would be good for superheavy players, and a second agreement on what might be proper for more ordinary forces.

[jesterofthedark]

Is this conversation moving towards something completely out of the spirit of the mega battle?

If we start over analyzing forces and setting up the matches doesn't it just take the game out of the players hands?

Some super heavies are not built to kill other super heavies, a banelord loves to chump him some titans but a baneblade is looking to get his template jollies on some squads.  Now, there is the question put of whether or not flyers should also be split off to prevent some form of domination from them.  But, then why even bother taking bombers? Only flyers that excel in dog fighting would be taken.  Then whats left?  The normal kids table, where everyone just brings 4k of their armies and gets an asset?  

I like the separate tables, I think that while it was three different games there was still a tie between them where sides where communicating and following what was going on at other tables.  There was a pull to do better on your table if you knew the other tables where no doing as well.  

Maybe instead of focusing on a table where only super heavies are allowed we should look to having just a table where they are not allowed.  Much in the theme of the underground, which did allow some super heavies, but next year have that be the place to go if you think that you will be too out gunned or don't have access to the models some people do.  It would also be an easier format to limit more stuff like data sheets that allow multiple assets.

[Chase]

I'm interested in this conversation.

Also, how do you all feel about four 5v5 tables and one 10v10 vs. two 5v5 tables and two 10v10?

These are just ideas... nothing is remotely close to set in stone.

[the_trooper]

Something brought up before was a superheavy registration.  There can still be some hidden aspects of player armies but in the spirit of good fun, maybe we can keep the arms race a bit more manageable.

Basically since this is a big game of apocalypse and apocalypse is about doing nuts things that one would not normally do on a table top. (Ok, I bring dreadnoughts in a chaos army so the banelord is a bad example)

If both teams take a gentleman's agreement that we know what each other have to give them a chance.  No need to plan to table but if things are more transparent, there would be less of a need to try and over do it.  

I was also tossing around the idea to be self restrictive.  The banelord and rob's titans can be an example.  The banelord is a warlord that is possessed and rages.   It also doesn't contain any ranged D weapons and is only really effective at meleeing superheavies.   Rob tends to self moderate with using vulcan megabolters and missile launchers for variety.

I wouldn't mind seeing Emperors on the table again (I swear to Khorne that we will spend more than 8 hours next time  ) just that maybe instead of all D, we take more themed stuff.  Like the Black Emperor (I love that term, Bob) should be kitted out like the Dies Irae while the Red Emperor can also tone down the D love.  

A gentleman's agreement I think can fix things and teammates helping and discussing what their team brings is part of the fun of the megabattle.  I'm not talking about overwhelming or bulling but sometimes people just want to help and sometimes people want suggestions as 40+ player events can be daunting.

Separate tables were quite nice and using them to tier the escalation is a nice way of doing it.

Something else I propose, which was mentioned but we didn't flesh out, is a tiered way of considering superheavies.  I'll start a thread about it later and we can discuss and come to an agreement.  If we have a class system which separates superheavies, it could help as far as gauging power levels and balance.

[General Leevous]

I personally love the idea of more tables than less. That way people can be fielded with and against people that they will enjoy playing with (example I talked to paul who was the opposite team this year to see where he was gonna be fielded so that I could suggest to my team to be fielded against him because I enjoy playing paul). I had a blast because of this. Other people had not so much fun due to being fielded against something they weren't expecting. If we have more tables other than less, it could be more manageable to have these types of battles instead of someone completely trashing another player.

But then again I love the strategic part of having a larger table. I was honered when order thought of me as a really big threat by wanting my tower dead and using 2 persision strikes and sending like 6 flyers on scabiathrax in order to take him down. It was intense and I had a blast. so in this subject I'm torn.

In all though I believe more tables could alter the game greatly and it would be worth a shot